(Washington,
D.C.)—An estimated 1,150,000 descended on the National Mall in Washington, D.C.,
on April 25 to give an urgent wake-up call to government leaders and the nation
regarding the threat to women’s health and the right to abortion. Women were
there to point out that their lives are at risk as lawmakers and government
officials keep intruding on a woman’s right to access critical reproductive
health services and make deeply personal decisions about their health and
lives.

Using
standard crowd estimate methods, March participants were counted in designated
grids on the National Mall, which are designed to hold a predetermined number
of people. The March also verified this count by assigning 2,500 volunteers to
stand at key entry points to the March area and at bus drop-off locations and
count people by placing March stickers on participants as they entered these
entry points. The National Park Police has stopped giving march estimates since
it became embroiled in controversy over other actions. However the corporate
media referred to the size as hundreds of thousands, playing down the scope of
the turnout, although the New York Times did quote the estimate of over one
million, given by the march organizers.

On April 25
women marched to uphold—Choice, Justice, Access, Health, Abortion, Global and
Family Planning. The March for Women’s Lives was led by seven organizing
groups: American Civil Liberties Union, Black Women’s Health Imperative,
Feminist Majority, NARAL Pro-Choice America, National Latina Institute for
Reproductive Health, National Organization for Women, and Planned Parenthood
Federation of America. However, the coalition that organized this march was far
broader than the sponsoring groups and included other women’s groups as well as
civil libertarians, trade unionists, students, and environmentalists. More than
1,200 organizations including some of the nation’s leading women’s, civil
rights, health, and faith organizations and delegations from around the world
mobilized to demand that women, regardless of income, age, race, and ethnicity,
be able to exercise their reproductive rights through legal access to safe
abortions, birth control (including emergency contraception), reproductive and
prenatal health care, safe delivery and comprehensive, medically accurate sex
education.

The following
quotes are highlights excerpted from remarks given by leaders of the coalition
that organized the March. They are taken from an e-mail put out by the National
Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL).

“The
government does not belong in our bedrooms. It does not belong in our doctors’
offices. It does not belong in the bank accounts of innocent Americans, and
should not have the power to monitor their e-mail, or track their bookstore
purchases, or scrutinize the books they check out of local libraries,” said
Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union
(ACLU). “Our fundamental right to privacy is under serious attack by this
government.”

“This
historic march is sending an unmistakable message: women’s rights and women’s
lives are nonnegotiable,” stated Eleanor Smeal, president of the Feminist
Majority. “We are building an expanded and inclusive movement that will make
women’s reproductive rights—just like social security—a third rail of
politics.”

“My friends,
make no mistake. There is a war on choice. We didn’t start it, but we are going
to win it!” said Gloria Feldt, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of
America. “They’re not just after abortion rights. This is a full-throttle war
on your very health—on your access to real sex education, birth control,
medical privacy, and life-saving research.”

“My greatest
wish is that there would never be another political debate about the right to
choose,” said Kate Michelman, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America. “But
history teaches us that every right—no matter how basic—is always at risk. And
I’m confident that the young people who have led this march today will lead our
movement in a new wave of activism that will keep the right to choose alive for
the next generation.”

“This March
is a giant wake-up call,” said Kim Gandy, president of the National
Organization for Women (NOW). “We won’t go back to 1968, when women couldn’t
buy birth control; we won’t go back to 1972, when women were dying from illegal
abortions. We’re marching for our rights before it’s too late.”

“The
reproductive health of Black women is in a state of crisis. Black women are
suffering and dying too often, too soon, and needlessly,” said Dr. Lorraine
Cole, president and CEO of the Black Women’s Health Imperative. “When we leave
here today, let’s turn pain into promise, let’s turn promise into partnership,
and let’s turn partnership into power.”

“We demand an
end to coercive and punitive policies that prevent us from making informed
decisions about our health, our lives and our futures!” said Silvia Henriquez,
executive director of the National Latina Institute of Reproductive Health. “We
envision a day when no Latina will live in a climate of fear and oppression,
when every person has access to comprehensive and affordable health care. That
is reproductive justice!”

The unity
expressed by the coalition of organizations developed to organize the march was
the cause of the turnout and was impressive. The inclusion of the Black Women’s
Health Imperative and the National Latina Institute of Reproductive Health was
an attempt to address a long-standing issue of the predominantly white women’s
organizations failing to either reach out to or successfully incorporate third
world women in their agenda or organizing efforts in the past. For the first
time, organizations representing women of color were playing a central role in
leading a women’s rights march. Representing the urgent needs of women of color,
who are least likely to have health care options and who suffer from
reproductive health disparities, a diverse coalition of women’s health and
civil rights groups, including the NAACP, the National Council of Negro Women,
and the National Latina Health network helped to broaden the March’s aim to
fight for equal access to solutions for the full range of women’s health care
concerns. This is the first time that the NAACP has taken the historic action
of endorsing a march for reproductive rights.

The age
composition of the march deserves comment. In this writer’s opinion, it
appeared that the crowd was roughly one-third young, one-third middle-age, and one-third
older marchers. Speakers referred to the passing of the baton to the younger
generation of women who must take up and lead the fight. The coalition honored
the young women organizers on stage, and each one addressed the crowd. Black
and Latina youth spoke militantly about the need to address the issues of
minorities and to organize them into the women’s movement for reproductive
rights and health care.

This was one
of the best-organized marches that this author has ever attended since some of
the largest actions in Washington, D. C., against the Vietnam war in the 1960s
and ‘70s. The mall was completely full, yet people were still streaming to the
mall from side streets and Metro stations. Parking was organized outside the
city, and the press reported that 325,000 people rode the Metro that day, a
figure that seems too low from what this reporter witnessed. The coalition had
positioned the type of giant-screens-with-sound used at rock concerts all around
the mall, so that everyone. no matter how far from the stage, could see and
hear the entire rally, thus setting a new standard in professionalism for march
organization. The event was being videotaped and relations with the press were
well organized.

Also
impressive was the large number of female actresses, including but not limited
to Susan Sarandon, Kathleen Turner, Cybill Shepard, and Whoopi Goldberg. Whoopi
Goldberg opened the rally and made one of the best speeches of the day.
Brandishing a coat hanger over her head she led the crowd in a chant “we will
not go back,” referring to the days when death resulted from back alley and
self-administered abortions.

The hypocrisy
of Madeleine Albright speaking at this March for Women’s Lives must be noted.
This former secretary of state under Democrat Bill Clinton is notorious for her
assertion that the death of half a million Iraqi children—as the result of
U.S./UN sanctions after the 1991 war on Iraq—was “worth it.” (Surely half those
Iraqi children were female.) I question the wisdom of the leadership of this
march in inviting one of the architects of, and a chief apologist for, U.S.
imperialist policy on Iraq to be a speaker.

Dorothy
Height, president emeritus of the National Council of Negro Women, could not be
present but was heard and seen on video. Also represented were many gay and
lesbian groups, lawyers, social workers, welfare rights organizations, the
National Council of Jewish Women, Catholics for Free Choice, the Asian Pacific
Environmental Group, the NAACP, Network of Young Women Mexico, student
organizations, and a host of women representatives from the U.S. Congress.

All together,
there were 50 speakers in the morning and 70 speakers for the afternoon rally,
an organizational accomplishment in itself.

How Much Real Outreach to Women of Color?

An article by
Ginger Adams Otis, a WeNews correspondent dated 4/22/04, claims that, unlike
other pro-choice rallies, this one was being led by women of color and
organizations that represent them. She points out that the real impact of this
new element in the women’s movement will extend beyond the march itself. She
maintained that the participation of women of color has pushed the focus of the
rally beyond the right to abortion and created a call for a broader range of
goals such as access to day care and child care.

Loretta Ross,
Executive Director of the National Center for Human rights Education and the
first African American woman to co-direct a national protest for choice, said
that putting the reproductive issues that most matter to women of color will
forever change the women’s movement.

“Women of
color are going to be joining other women in really large numbers to show their
outrage at what’s being done to their reproductive rights,” Ross said. “When we
approached the principal organizers about being included, they invested a lot
of money in mobilizing among communities of color and making sure the message
goes out to a lot of people. That hard work is going to pay off on Sunday.”

“…the
right to have a child and get health care, an education, safe drinking water,
day care—these are the issues Latinas link to reproductive rights,” said Silvia
Henriquez, director of the Brooklyn-headquartered National Latina Institute for
Reproductive Health. “It’s as much about taking care of their families as it is
being able to terminate a pregnancy.”

Many of the
immigrant women who turn to this organization come from countries where
reproductive health care has been severely constrained. “they come from
countries where forced sterilization is still common and where an abortion is
really dangerous and can land you in jail. They’ve seen their health care
providers criminalized and jailed for just giving them birth control pills.”
Otis quotes Henriquez as saying that as a result many Latinas are anxious to
attain reproductive justice in this country…” With the Hispanic population
set to be the largest U.S. minority within the next several decades, Otis notes
“the women’s movement has much to gain by broadening its agenda to include this
very large population of women.”

In spite of
this new attempt to involve women of color on the part of the march organizers,
the crowd was still predominantly white. This raises questions of what can be
done to promote unity between white women and women of color in the future. It
is interesting that Loretta Ross is quoted as saying that she approached the
principal organizers of the march to be included. This indicates that the
problem still persists of the predominantly white women’s organizations calling
and planning actions before seeking to include the leaders of women of color. This
author is not aware if attempts were made to include the organizers of the
Million Woman March or not.

March
organizers referred to this as the single largest feminist rally to take place
in the United States after the March for Choice of 12 years ago that drew an
estimated 750,000 marchers. However, no one referred to the Million Woman March,
which was estimated by some to include one million to one and a half million
marchers in 1997 in the city of Philadelphia and drew a predominantly Black
female crowd. Did the organizers of this year’s march attempt to involve the
organizers of the Million Woman March, and if not, why not?

The power of
women united, if these two powerful forces were one and decided to act
independently of the two major parties on behalf of the needs of millions of
women of all races can only be imagined.

Pro-Democrat Orientation

This failure
could be indicative of the attempt to keep the speakers, key organizers and
organizations included in the speakers list limited to those who strongly
endorse and support the march leadership’s orientation of getting Democrats
elected and defeating Bush in the upcoming presidential election. Many speakers
addressed the need to defeat Bush and some openly called for electing Kerry.
Kerry signs were common throughout the crowd giving the political impact of the
rally a pro-Democratic Party one. Official policy stated the following in
regard to signs and banners: “The March is a nonpartisan event focused on the
threat to women’s lives. To ensure it is strictly nonpartisan, do not display
any signs or banners that contain endorsements for or opposition to a political
party or candidate for elected office…Official March banners may not display
support for or opposition to any candidate or political party. Such banners may
not carry the name of a political party or a candidate committee, but may carry
the name of an individual who is a candidate with or without his or her
official title. For example: a banner may say ‘Senator John Doe’ or ‘Mayor Jane
Doe,’ but not ‘Doe for Senate’ or ‘Doe/Smith ’04.’”

The official
policy statement continued: “The March logo may not be used to promote any
electioneering or partisan political activity. Neither the logo nor the name of
the March may be used in a way that suggests a connection between the March and
any political campaign activity.”

No Mention of Iraq

In spite of
this official policy on the march web site, there were many “Kerry for President”
signs and banners at the march, and it was clear that Democratic Party
organizers were working the crowd. A small number of speakers called for
support to Kerry. This was probably why there was not one mention or reference
to the war on Iraq and the billions of dollars going to promote that
imperialist crime, which Kerry supports. This was a remarkable omission at a
women’s rally led by organizations like NOW, which claim to stand for peace and
against violence against women and violence of all kinds. Even Susan Sarandon,
who is passionately against the war and who has spoken out militantly against
it at antiwar marches, refrained from making the links between funding for the
military and the cutbacks in funding for reproductive health around the world.
This suggests that speakers could have been asked not to embarrass Kerry on
this question, which might undermine support for him.

Unfortunately,
this was the position promoted by the official march organizers and shows that
on the question of how best to defend reproductive freedoms, the right to
choose, and the needs of the vast majority of women, this leadership lacks a
program to bring about change. Eleanor Smeal, the leader of the Feminist
Majority, an organization that she built after she was no longer president of NOW,
at one point was leading a movement to build a Feminist Party and was pointing
out the record of both the Democrats and the Republicans in failing to defend
the needs and rights of women. However, she has been strangely silent on this
score for years now, since abandoning the call for a third party and
independent political action.

Some of the
leadership preferred to keep sights sharply focused on last fall’s passage of
the so-called partial birth abortion ban, which outlaws most abortions beyond
the first 12 weeks of pregnancy and makes no exception to protect the health of
women. President Bush signed the ban into law, even though the Supreme Court found
a similar law unconstitutional. Activists have filed lawsuits challenging the
ban, including the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the ACLU. and the
Center for Reproductive Rights. Until rulings are determined in these three
lawsuits the federal ban is temporarily blocked by a federal court injunction.

In light of
the continuing defeats that the women’s movement has sustained over the last
decade, one has to question why the leadership of the major women’s
organizations waited for 12 years to march. Hillary Clinton made the remark
that under her husband’s term it was not necessary to defend the right to
abortion. However, it was under the Clinton administration that serious inroads
were made by the “right to life” movement, inroads that have culminated in the
partial birth abortion ban.

It is
interesting to note that NOW and the other major reformist organizations only
seem to march before elections they wish to influence and don’t see the need to
mobilize women independently on an ongoing basis.

This is the
task of a new women’s leadership that must be built that can provide an
alternative, especially for young women and people of color, an alternative to
the policies of the two major parties. Women have to confront the question, Why
has the Democratic Party been so woefully ineffective in supporting women’s
rights and defending women from the right-wing attempt to take back the gains
that have been made. Women have to ask why a woman has never been nominated for
president by a major party in the twenty one national elections since women won
the right to vote. Women have to ask why there are only five women governors in
fifty states. Women have to ask why they hold only 13 percent of the seats in
Congress. Women have to examine why the Equal Rights Amendment went down to
defeat. And women have to ask if the strategy of those who promote lesser evil
politics has been getting us anywhere.

As Michael
Moore wrote in Stupid White Men: “So
figure. Suddenly women had more votes; they could have thrown our collective
male ass into the political trash heap. But what did they do? They voted for
us! How cool is that? Have you ever heard of any group of oppressed people that
suddenly, by their sheer numbers, takes charge—and then votes in overwhelming
numbers to keep their oppressors in power? The Blacks of South Africa, once
free, did not continue apartheid by voting for whites…No, the usual thing a
sane society does is give the boot to the boot that’s been on its neck for
umpteen years.”

However, eighty
years after women gained the right to vote, the leadership of the women’s
movement in this country is still doing exactly that, proposing to vote our
oppressors back into office—as the lesser evil of course. How cool is that? It
isn’t cool at all; in fact, it’s downright embarrassing.

Let me raise
the possibility of the grass roots supporters of the March for Women’s Lives
joining collectively with the grass roots women who attended the Million Woman March
in Philadelphia to begin to run candidates and build a party with other working
people independent of our oppressors and for policies that defend the majority
of working women in this country. How cool would that be? Very cool!